Case Information
*1 Case 2:19-cv-00523-RSM Document 111 Filed 11/04/21 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware Case No. C19-523RSM corporation, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR OVER- Plaintiff, LENGTH BRIEFING v.
ROY ORON, an individual, et al.,
Defendants.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Amazon.com, Inc.’s Motion to file over- length briefing for a motion for default judgment against Defendants Roy Oron and Clickonomy Ltd. Dkt. #110. A Motion for the Court to enter default judgment against a party that has not appeared is typically limited to six pages. See LCR 7(d)(1), LCR 7(e)(1). Where a party has appeared but is in default, such Motions are limited to 12 pages and must be noted for consideration no earlier than three Fridays after filing. LCR 7(d)(3), LCR 7(e)(4). Amazon argues that good cause exists here to file briefing “not to exceed 45 pages.” Dkt. #110 at 2.
“Motions seeking approval to file an over-length motion or brief are disfavored.” LCR 7(f).
As an initial matter, the Court believes Defendant Oron has appeared in this case, even though the Court has entered default against him. See, e.g., Dkt. #54, Dkt. #68. Although ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR OVER-LENGTH BRIEFING - 1 *2 Case 2:19-cv-00523-RSM Document 111 Filed 11/04/21 Page 2 of 2 Defendant Clickonomy Ltd has not appeared, the Court believes Amazon’s forthcoming motion for default judgment against both Defendants should be noted for consideration under LCR 7(d)(3) so that Mr. Oron has an opportunity to respond. As such, it will be limited to 12 pages of briefing by local rule.
The Court has determined it can rule on the instant Motion without responsive briefing. Amazon’s entire Motion is five sentences. To satisfy the good cause standard, Amazon states only that this case “includes significant legal and factual briefing regarding the Court’s jurisdiction, Roy Oron and Clickomy Ltd.’s liability, the seven factors in Eitel v. McCool , 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986), and Amazon’s request for damages and an injunction.” Dkt. #110 at 2. While it may be true that this case involves a complex fact pattern, every motion for default judgment must address the seven Eitel factors. Most plaintiffs have no difficulty doing so within twelve pages. To the extent Amazon believes good cause for triple that amount should be obvious here from the Court’s review of previous briefing, it could equally be said that Amazon can rely on that briefing and need not repeat it in the forthcoming motion. Amazon has not established good cause.
Having reviewed Amazon’s Motion and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Amazon’s Motion for Over-length Briefing, Dkt. #110, is DENIED.
DATED this 4 th day of November, 2021.
A RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR OVER-LENGTH BRIEFING - 2